Posts: 483
Threads: 18
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
0
It's a lot of work inputing all those orders though Dave. Also figure if turns are submitted early (they have been processed early before in this variant) the time involved might be quite a lot if Cipher is knocking out multiple additional turns per week/month - for the $$.
I think Will would submit multiple turns per day if he could...
I understand all points of view on the $$ mater but the game is of an era where it's not simply automated.
I'm VERY happy with the moderation and turns are processed timely and it's an antiquated (by computer standards) game but a great game nonetheless.
Rick and Co need to make revenue and I'm happy to pay what I am but I sympathize with people having sticker shock also. Logically there has to be a price point where it generates adequate revenue. If the game was that much cheaper would the game be profitable to the point where it's feasible to operate? I dunno the answer but my $$ isn't on the line in that regard.
I'll say that for my $$ I'm getting quite a lot of gaming.
To be fair you have remarked about the $ aspect a few times but you were a hard core MTG player. Please tell us all how much $$ you put into MTG per month 
Posts: 721
Threads: 34
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
0
Dave, when you and I used to play the old Epic games (i.e. TItan) back in the day, we definitely spent more than $40/month.
Posts: 2,252
Threads: 227
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
0
What was it? Maybe a discounted $5 per kingdom, per turn? That would be $120 each month for a Titan game. Way too expensive for my taste, but some of you fanatics managed it for several Tital games!
Besides, at $42 per month you get plenty more games as well.
Lord Diamond
Please do not take any of my comments as a personal insult or as a criticism of the game 'Alamaze', which I very much enjoy. Rather, I hope that my personal insight and unique perspective may, in some way, help make 'Alamaze' more fun, a more successful financial venture, or simply more sustainable as a long-term project. Anyone who reads this post should feel completely free to ignore, disregard, scorn, implement, improve, dispute, or otherwise comment upon its content.
Posts: 721
Threads: 34
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
0
06-13-2013, 03:08 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-13-2013, 03:10 PM by wfrankenhoff.)
I don't think it was $120/month, probably closer to $80-90, but it was significantly more than the current monthly subscription and that was only for one game! The imperator option allows you to play TWO titan games at half the cost with more turns run in a month. Can't see why the old-timers are complaining....
But it doesn't change the fact there are no takers for Titan right now (aside from me). Heck, the second warlords game is still in limbo. I've got to think the issue isn't price but the time/experience needed to run multiple kingdoms.
Posts: 2,252
Threads: 227
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
0
For me, it is the time and experience thing. I feel that I would do very poorly at a Titan game now. Maybe when I stop making stupid mistakes in an individual game I will step up to an Epic game.
I do like the concept of a 6v6. I would prefer it to be a 6 or 12 player format than a 2-player.
Lord Diamond
Please do not take any of my comments as a personal insult or as a criticism of the game 'Alamaze', which I very much enjoy. Rather, I hope that my personal insight and unique perspective may, in some way, help make 'Alamaze' more fun, a more successful financial venture, or simply more sustainable as a long-term project. Anyone who reads this post should feel completely free to ignore, disregard, scorn, implement, improve, dispute, or otherwise comment upon its content.
Posts: 721
Threads: 34
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
0
Once you play an entire side and explore the tactical and strategic options, it's hard to go back to playing a single nation. The options are so....limited.
With 2 players, the pacing can really change. I believe there was a series of three turns processed in less than 48 hours in game 200 or 201, right Will?
202 seems to be on a 7-8 day schedule.
Posts: 721
Threads: 34
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
0
The pacing does indeed change, determined only by the speed with which the players submit their turns. Sometimes it leads to player error (certainly in my case  ) but it's fun as all heck.
Posts: 483
Threads: 18
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
0
Maybe more players would be up for a 2 man team Titan variant?
The trouble with Warlords being it's basically a 6-9 situation almost assuredly.
I'd play a Warlords/Titan variant with the 12 positions split among 4 players more readily than a Warlords or team game for that matter-
An aside______
I think the $$ issue is that people have more and more gaming options and a lot of new "Apps" and whatever are being churned out. A lot of these are a one shot payment deal and whatever... people want to play this game on the cheap now as a result. I doubt it's feasible and have 0 pricing complaint here but I understand the logic.
My counter argument is this: How many games have you looked back on and still wanted to play after 25+ years? MTG is the only other game that I cannot quit at some level. I was unable to play Alamaze for over a decade and I always was on the lookout for it. Not so with any other games...
Posts: 2,252
Threads: 227
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
0
I would like to see a 4-player Titan variant. Or a 12-player game or that matter.
Lord Diamond
Please do not take any of my comments as a personal insult or as a criticism of the game 'Alamaze', which I very much enjoy. Rather, I hope that my personal insight and unique perspective may, in some way, help make 'Alamaze' more fun, a more successful financial venture, or simply more sustainable as a long-term project. Anyone who reads this post should feel completely free to ignore, disregard, scorn, implement, improve, dispute, or otherwise comment upon its content.
|
